The Law Offices of Lawrence D. Rohlfing has represented the disabled since 1985 before the Social Security Administration, District Courts across the country, Circuit Courts of Appeal, and the United States Supreme Court.
All rights reserved. Copyright 2018.

Monday, May 29, 2017

In our unending quest to put consistency into the adjudicative mode, here is the list of the 74 Occupational Groups, according to BLS, that do not require a high school diploma (or equivalent) and have either no training time or short-term on-the-job training:

Saturday, May 27, 2017

So sayeth the ALJ in a decision to deny benefits. A claimant may not demonstrate that the vocational expert uttered bogus numbers of jobs by pointing to statistical evidence subject to administrative notice. We have entered full-force into the world of ipse dixit. The jobs exist in not just significant numbers but huge numbers because the vocational expert breathed them into existence.

The vocational expert testified -- you know, under oath -- that packers exist at all exertional levels and that 30,000 existed in the national economy at the sedentary range of exertion. No DOT code, not a sedentary one anyway, just because the vocational expert said so. That is ipse dixit.

There are 111 DOT codes with the title of "packer." None of those require sedentary exertion. Of that accumulation of occupations, 61 of them belong to packers and packagers, hand (SOC 53-7064). Six belong to machine bearers and off-loaders (SOC 53-7063). Three belong to the ubiquitous production workers, all other (SOC 51-9199). The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) scatters the rest in other occupational groups in clusters of eight, nine, eleven, and so forth. Our intrepid vocational expert identified packager, hand (DOT 920.587-018). For those so inclined to look it up -- yes, packager, hand requires medium exertion. It belongs to packers and packagers, hand (SOC 53-7064). And yes, the claimant has a limitation to sedentary exertion.

I know my way around the DOT, OOH, CBP, O*NET, and their related publications. How does anyone cross-examine this kind of bile in the context of an administrative hearing that is supposed to last 45 minutes. This occupation alone takes at least two hours to unpack, pun accidentally discovered and used with glee.

Start with the size of the occupational group of packers and packagers, hand (SOC code 53-7064). BLS put 59 DOT codes inside of the group. BLS counts jobs, after all, it specializes in labor statistics. BLS estimates that the occupational group consists of 705,660 jobs as of May 2016. This is up from 695,000 in May 2014. Engaging in gross, and statistical improper aggregation, the average DOT code represents circa 12,000 jobs. Two of the DOT codes in this group require sedentary exertion.

Ampoule sealer (DOT 559.687-014) exists in the pharmaceutical industry. The DOT describes the occupation as requiring sedentary exertion. Labor last updated this DOT code in 1977. It belongs to packers and packagers, hand (SOC 53-7064).

Hand bander (DOT 920.687-030) exists in the tobacco manufacturing industry. The DOT describes the occupation as requiring sedentary exertion. Labor last updated this DOT code in 1977. It belongs to packers and packagers, hand (SOC 53-7064).

The O*NET reports that packers and packagers, hand spend time sitting on the job:

8

Spend Time Sitting — How much does this job require sitting?

0

Continually or almost continually

0

More than half the time

0

About half the time

31

Less than half the time

69

Never

While we get slightly different pictures of the occupational group depending on whether we look at standing or sitting, one conclusion remains consistent. None of the workers sit more than half the time or continually on the job.

By now, my confidence level in the vocational expert assertion that packing jobs exist at the sedentary range of exertion dwindles. Let's move to the Occupational Outlook Handbook (OOH), linked at the bottom of the page of the detail report tab in the O*NET for this group. The OOH puts packers and packagers, hand with other hand laborers and material movers. The OOH reports employment by industry for each SOC in the group.

On line 45 of the report, we find a report of packers and packagers, hand in the pharmaceutical and medicine manufacturing industry for our ampoule sealer occupation:

Percent of
Code Title Employment Industry

325400 Pharmaceutical and medicine manufacturing 2.8 1.0

BLS reports employment in thousands, so 2,800 jobs or 1.0% of total industry employment.

But I do remember that the vocational expert told us that packers exist at all levels of exertion. I suspect that Big Pharm employs a few hand packagers, that medium occupation. So the number is less than 2,800, probably less than half. Sealing ampoules is probably a fraction of the packing that goes on in the manufacture of pharmaceutical and medicine. Most of my clients get most of their medicine in tablet form.

Moving right along to hand bander occupation in the tobacco industry. The employment projection reports on line 26:

Percent of
Code Title Employment Industry

3122000 Tobacco manufacturing 0.3 2.2

Read that again -- 300 packers and packagers, hand in the tobacco industry. I suspect, having retained my commonsense, that the tobacco industry produces a lot more than cigars and pack a lot more than the banding of cigars with a wrapper. I could be wrong, but I doubt it.

Let's go to the second item of administrative notice, just in case some ALJ might want to swill the kool-aid of vocational expert ipse dixit. County Business Patterns reports:

Applying 1.0% of industry employment for pharmaceutical and medicine manufacturing yields 2,423 jobs. Slightly lower, but check. We could back out jobs in codes 325413 and 325414 and reduce the number of jobs by 760, but at this point, we don't have to.

I have one request from the ALJ corps. Don't place productivity as the end all and be all of the process. Insist on a level of honesty and integrity that passes the disgusting test. This example of garbage testimony and equally garbage finding of fact -- just disgusting.

Friday, May 19, 2017

Taking a break from the vocational issues that have dominated this blog lately. On May 5, 2017, the five-day rule for the admission of evidence became effective. We explore the boundaries and implications of the rule.

20 CFR §§ 404.935(a) and 416.1436(a) provide in relevant part that:

Each party must make every effort to ensure that the administrative law judge receives all of the evidence and must inform us about or submit any written evidence, as required in §404.1512, no later than 5 business days before the date of the scheduled hearing. If you do not comply with this requirement, the administrative law judge may decline to consider or obtain the evidence, unless the circumstances described in paragraph (b) of this section apply.

SSA states the obligation in the alternative. Either submit the evidence five business days before the hearing or inform the ALJ of the existence of the evidence five business days before the hearing. If the representative learns of new evidence and promptly informs the ALJ within five days of the hearing while contemporaneously making the request for records, the representative and the claimant has complied with the regulation.

The regulations address the failure to comply with the five-day rule to inform or submit. Subsection (b) states:

If you have evidence required under §404.1512 but you have missed the deadline described in paragraph (a) of this section, the administrative law judge will accept the evidence if he or she has not yet issued a decision and you did not inform us about or submit the evidence before the deadline because: ...

This subsection confirms the reading of subsection (a). The ALJ will accept the evidence after the passage of the deadline if the ALJ has not issued a decision and the claimant/representative did not inform the agency about the evidence before the deadline. We don't get to the conditions for considering the late evidence if the predicate of the syllogism does not apply.

The solution is self-evident. Get a list of care providers from the claimant and submit that list to SSA a month or two before the hearing. If the representative hits a snag in the collection of evidence, the informing the ALJ of the existence of the evidence 45 days ago protects the "late submission." The regulation does not force an emergency record procurement with the attendant costs to the claimant. Inform the ALJ of the care providers, all of them, well before the five days expires.